Bible thumping, attacks upon scientists, propaganda and pseudo-science - but that should keep their bigoted and often ignorant supporters in line:

https://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2018/1 ... -past.html''Likewise, there is a great deal of evidence all around us for the global Genesis Flood ... Inselbergs and other planation surfaces might be easily dismissed as anomalies, but they are found all around the world. Fossilization itself is evidence of the Flood as well, since there are billions of things buried all over and this requires a great deal of sediment and quick action. Indeed, secularists believe in long ages despite fossils that are found in "wrong places" according to their paradigm.''Er, NO:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inselberghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planation_surfacehttps://ageofrocks.wordpress.com/100-re ... th-is-old/The fossil record shows that lots and lots of animals died in the unseen past. Often prematurely due to natural events and localised or regional disasters - many of them are now extinct as well. Though of course most of the deceased animals did not become fossils. That is what the fossil record shows.

https://creation.com/mighty-mites-stifle-evolutionists 'Mighty mites stifle evolutionists.'''In fact, this sort of ‘stasis’ (looking much the same as modern-day representatives) is actually the rule, not the exception, for fossils in general...''.BANG goes (not the Big Bang but) all that very rapid post-flood hyper speciation (within so-called 'kinds') that Nathaniel Jeanson is banging on about in a book. This other YEC at CMI knows that stasis is the 'rule'.

https://creation.com/its-all-bluff 'It’s all bluff.'''The media often give the impression that evolution is scientific because scientists can tell us how it happened. In reality, the supposedly ‘factual’ accounts of where the universe came from and how the earth’s plant and animal life evolved are no more than imaginative stories. When pressed for details, the more honest scientists will sometimes admit that they really don’t know.''But young earth creationism is utter TOSH for fundamentalists, disproven TIME and AGAIN eg with that pesky Oumuamua comet, so who is REALLY bluffing? Those with a hardline religious agenda. ''The formation of amber, and all its many ‘non-evolved’ fossils, makes much more sense as a result of this Genesis Flood, around 4,500 years ago.'' You need to EXPLAIN that.

On 5 Feb Sorensen falsely claimed: ''One atheopath demanded an explanation of why dinosaur fossils have not been found at the Grand Canyon, was given a link explaining that neither secularists nor creationists expect this, ignored the answer and kept on like it was never provided.'' Once again LIAR SORENSEN - in February I did NOT ignore your 'answer'. I rejected it - because it was garbage. As I stated on 13 Feb, reiterating what I stated on 6 February, Sorensen FALSELY claimed that an article he flagged explained why there are no known dinosaur fossils at the Grand Canyon (which is something that 'flood geology' WOULD expect). THIS is the article that Sorensen flagged on 5 Feb: https://crev.info/2015/06/did-dinosaurs ... nd-canyon/ That article rejects that the exposed rocks at the Grand Canyon are too OLD for dinosaur fossils but then tries to explain away YECs believing dinosaurs 'did not see' the Grand Canyon (because their fossils have not been found there). The explanation? That ''the canyon formed after the great Flood of Noah’s day'' and ''the dinosaurs had all drowned during the Flood year, the last holdouts leaving footprints in Navajo sandstone at levels thousands of feet higher than the canyon sediments''. That is UNBIBLICAL as in Genesis (see Genesis 8:17 which does not remotely hint at ANY imminent extinctions of whole swathes of species)) the flood is not an extinction event NOR an event that was followed shortly afterwards (as shown in the slightly younger Navajo sandstone in which dinosaur fossils have been found just as evolutionists would expect) by complete extinction of all dinosaur species. Also OTHER YECs claim the Grand Canyon was formed as the waters of Noah's flood receded - NOT that the Grand Canyon formed 'after' Noah's flood. So - if that is correct (but it isn't) - WHY are those dinosaur fossils MISSING? All CREV has done is show that OTHER YECs appear to be wrong that the Grand Canyon is 'explained' by Noah's flood when all those dinosaurs allegedly ''drowned during the Flood year''. But what CREV (Coppedge) is trying to push (to explain missing fossils and pretend that YEC is scientific) goes AGAINST mainstream YEC flood geology! Which claims that the Grand Canyon is explained by the flood and that most dinosaur fossils were formed via 'rapid burial' during the catastrophic 'Genesis flood'.http://biblicalgeology.net/blog/grand-c ... ding-floodhttps://answersingenesis.org/geology/gr ... nd-canyon/https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... A_Critique

CREV adds that: ''The only possible way a dinosaur could have seen the Grand Canyon, in this view, would have been for descendents of surviving species taken on the Ark to have migrated to North America after the Flood''. But he CANNOT explain scientifically WHY dinosaur fossils are present in the more recent Navajo sandstone but apparently MISSING throughout the Grand Canyon. Real scientists CAN.

In fact the CREV article is even more ridiculous and full of disinformation than I realised! ''Their reason would be that the canyon formed after the great Flood of Noah’s day. The dinosaurs had all drowned during the Flood year, the last holdouts leaving footprints in Navajo sandstone at levels thousands of feet higher than the canyon sediments.'' He claims that drowned dinosaurs (killed in the flood) are missing from the Grand Canyon because it was carved (somehow) 'after' the flood. But then admits that dinosaur footprints (it's actual fossils I think) HAVE been found at the Navajo sandstone - which is younger STILL (as he implicitly ADMITS when he says that this is ''at levels thousands of feet higher''). So exactly WHY - assuming those footprints are from descendants of 'ark dinosaurs' as Coppedge suggests - did they go to the Navajo sandstone but MISS going to the (massive) Grand Canyon? It seems CREV either CANNOT explain this - or hasn't even noticed the DILEMMA. Assuming they reached the Navajo just centuries (or a millennium or two) after the Genesis flood, Coppedge has to explain HOW (if that is his claim) those layers (where there are dinosaur remains) were by then at levels ''thousands of feet higher'' than Grand Canyon layers or sediments.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navajo_Sandstone

So this is the challenge to Sorensen: Either PROVE that this CREV article explains (both scientifically and not unbiblically) why dinosaur fossils have not been found at the Grand Canyon. Or admit that it does NOT so explain it and is just making ad hoc claims - for which there is no hard evidence at all.

Silence or diversionary attacks against me behind my back (or 'to my face' from Long or Gordons) will prove that you are a LIAR. So go on - prove that you are 'not' a liar (I am forwarding this to Sorensen via his StormBringer's Thunder blog - and sending the challenge as a wide circulation email which is copied to Bob and his close associates).

''So this is the challenge to Sorensen: Either PROVE that this CREV article explains (both scientifically and not unbiblically) why dinosaur fossils have not been found at the Grand Canyon. Or admit that it does NOT so explain it and is just making ad hoc claims - for which there is no hard evidence at all.

Silence or diversionary attacks against me behind my back (or 'to my face' from Long or Gordons) will prove that you are a LIAR. So go on - prove that you are 'not' a liar (I am forwarding this to Sorensen via his StormBringer's Thunder blog - and sending the challenge as a wide circulation email which is copied to Bob and his close associates).''

Sorensen chose DIVERSIONARY TACTICS. This being his emailed response:''I see that not only is Haywire the Criminal Cyberstalker and Fabricator of His Own Reality spamming people continually, he is also spamming the comments on my weblogs. See what rebellion against God does to the mind? When people disagree with his "logic" (which he has never demonstrated where my lists of his fallacies are wrong) or his misrepresentations of science and of biblical creationists, he gets all Dalek on them. By the way, instead of calling me a liar all the time, he should: 1) Learn what liar means; 2) Learn that there is a difference between deception and disagreement; 3) Back up his claims that I have lied instead of constantly reasserting he has done so (he must think the few people who actually read his tripe are stupid); 4) Answer my challenge of long ago, that if I was indeed lying, why is it wrong in his worldview? I would just be responding to my chemical impulses, just as he is doing in his efforts to destroy lil' ol' me.''

This being my wide circulation further email reply:''Sorensen's response is diversionary tactics. Thus proving that he is a liar. Just as I have been saying publicly for many years.viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3925&p=52316&hilit=diversionary#p52316It is disturbing that there is so much twisted hatred, outright lying, and avoidance of reality amongst the American public this decade. Only in the mind of Sorensen does this detailed critique 'not' exist or not amount to anything. Nowhere else:viewtopic.php?f=18&t=3153&start=1215

That message from the boor took me just over five minutes to address. (I then checked his Facebook pages before finalising my response.)

This hypocrite also claims to do 'critical thinking'. It's a pity his 'critical thinking' does not include answering a STRAIGHT question (something that explains why all dissenters are routinely permanently banned from his Facebook pages). This being the question he is refusing to answer (but refusing to do so is also incriminating): Either PROVE that this CREV article explains (both scientifically and not unbiblically) why dinosaur fossils have not been found at the Grand Canyon. Or admit that it does NOT so explain it and is just making ad hoc claims - for which there is no hard evidence at all.''

'Cowboy' Bob Sorensen IS a pathological liar. (And a young earth creationist.)